NRC onwards and upwards

[Highlander35]

Under this hypothetical, we can be a little less stringent than the Soup with some other stuff too.

Aussies who get capped for a teir 2 nations for example, could be allowed to stay and play if teams want them, and they're happy to stay for the money offered.

James Hilterbrand, Tom Coolican, Eddie Aholelei, Jerry Yanayanatawa, Campese Ma'afu, Greg Peterson and Alofa Alofa are just some off the top of my head that stayed/returned or could have chosen to stay/return to Australia at some point but have been capped by Teir 2 nations so teams can't sign them without being marquees. With twice the number of teams, the necessity of all the players to be eligible Aussies is reduced.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Under this hypothetical, we can be a little less stringent than the Soup with some other stuff too.

Aussies who get capped for a teir 2 nations for example, could be allowed to stay and play if teams want them, and they're happy to stay for the money offered.

James Hilterbrand, Tom Coolican, Eddie Aholelei, Jerry Yanayanatawa, Campese Ma'afu, Greg Peterson and Alofa Alofa are just some off the top of my head that stayed/returned or could have chosen to stay/return to Australia at some point but have been capped by Teir 2 nations so teams can't sign them without being marquees. With twice the number of teams, the necessity of all the players to be eligible Aussies is reduced.

True. Then there's players from other nations that could be interested in playing.

The biggest question is money. Would this hypothetical scenario deliver enough money for it to be viable. From the initial TV deal the original 10 NRC cost the ARU $1.5m a season. You could safely assume that you could double that if not triple. Then there's salaries etc.

I'd like to find out exactly how many games the $58m per annum in the new deal covers. If it's just the Aus. home games plus Tests then you're looking at roughly $1m (again this is very much a guess) so it maybe possible. Maybe.

 

[Forcefield]

I wonder if Singapore would consider joining. Not much further away than Perth and obviously keen for greater Rugby exposure (based on Super Rugby application).

 

[TOCC]

No Aussie expansion please, the NSW teams are only competitive in 2016 following the Stars merging.. QLD teams are bottom placed so clearly not enough talent to spread even further there... Spirit, Rising and Vikings Super Rugby club are all facing financial difficulties without bankrolling another team.

Singapore is willing to invest in premium sport content as part of a tourism push, it's not a rugby driven motive.. the NRC wouldn't even rate on their priority list of comps to attract.

Adelaide doesn't have the playing stock and Australian Rugby doesn't have the funding to bankroll moving 30 players to Adelaide for the duration of the tournament.

TV ratings aren't going to explode overnight, a Fijian inclusion will be a benefit but it's certainly not going to make any real increase in the value of the rights.. current rights are signed until 2020, within this the ARU may be able to increase/decrease teams but the value of the rights won't change.

Include Fiji for 2017, with possibility for Samoa/Tonga in the following years. Having a bye round isn't the worst thing in the world.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

No Aussie expansion please, the NSW teams are only competitive in 2016 following the Stars merging.. QLD teams are bottom placed so clearly not enough talent to spread even further there. Spirit, Rising and Vikings Super Rugby club are all facing financial difficulties without bankrolling another team.

Singapore is willing to invest in premium sport content as part of a tourism push, it's not a rugby driven motive.. the NRC wouldn't even rate on their priority list of comps to attract.

Adelaide doesn't have the playing stock and Australian Rugby doesn't have the funding to bankroll moving 30 players to Adelaide for the duration of the tournament.

TV ratings aren't going to explode overnight, a Fijian inclusion will be a benefit but it's certainly not going to make any real increase in the value of the rights.. current rights are signed until 2020, within this the ARU may be able to increase/decrease teams but the value of the rights won't change.

Include Fiji for 2017, with possibility for Samoa/Tonga in the following years. Having a bye round isn't the worst thing in the world.

It was brought up as purely part of a hypothetical we were indulging over on the other page.

 

[Lindommer]

.....of the Rays and Rams taking games to Newcastle/Central Coast and Wollongong. While I know they are in their own right distinct regions in themselves they are also very much satellites of both teams catchments in some respects. Let the Eagles build a base in the other larger regional centres.

Fer starters, how about the Rays/Rams play one of these matches away in the year they have four home games? This year the Rams have three home games, play one in Wollongong next year. Get the Illawarra boys involved, free entry for all juniors wearing club clobber, $10 entry for accompanying parents, etc. Same for the Rays and Newcastle/Gosford. The Brumbies could play a match in the sporting capital of the western world, Wagga Wagga, in the year they have four home games.

 

[NTT]

Its all hypothetical of course but we should be looking at U/20s division. Currently the best U/20s players only have the 4 matches of Super U/20s to be involved in a higher level competition. Adding in another 9 or 10 games will do a world of good to the young guys coming through. Most young fellas would jump at getting the chance to play more rep rugby. Yes there are increased costs involved, but its a cheap, obvious way to expand our pathways. The current contracts are locked in place i know, but we should be building up our sellable product now in time for the next round of tv deals. Having all NRC games live on Foxtel, one a week on FTA and 2 U/20s games a week on tv is the minimum we should be looking to sell to the TV providers/streaming services. Internet streaming services will start to boom in the next few years so there will be money there if we are smart enough to capture it.
I know a lot of you will pour cold water all over my ideas and thats fine. It is also shortsighted. We need to have goals for the future income, for the future diversity of media coverage, for the future playing stocks and for the survival of our game. The ARU, and for a large part the current fanbase, does not seem to be able to see where our game should be going or how its going to get there. You make more money selling more product not less, every business in the world could tell you that. Hell, even a dumbass like me knows that. Its high time the ARU started working towards that.

 

[amirite]

NTT - future strategy documents talk about an U19 competition openly (probably for 2018). From here the better players from that comp play U20s Super.

Meaning that in a window from September to April the players players play 12 or so high level games across 2 tournaments, then focus on the 20s WC. The better ones will then play regular NRC.

 

[Highlander35]

A full length reserve/colts comp is a bit of a pipe dream IMO.

But maybe something along the lines of a U19 tournament?

Say across two weekends, (maybe the school holidays?) the NRC teams all send an U19 team (with perhaps up to 3 U20 guests) to Sydney.

Standard Knock out tournament, with 2nd tier semis, and 3rd/5th/7th placing matches.

Gives a very broad look at the junior talent, what with the cream of the schoolboys locked up with International duty, and the cream of the U20s in the NRC.

 

[Quick Hands]

I'd leave expansion in terms of an increase in teams well and truly alone. The NRC is just starting to get itself established.

What I would do if I were the ARU would be to have a women's competition ready to go for 2017. Same teams and play the women's game before the mens' game. At the moment there's a far greater chance of getting on to free to air with a women's component. And probably a very sympathetic ear from sponsors.

Every other sport in Australia is really getting a women's version of their game set, we don't want to be left at the starting barriers again.

 

[amirite]

A full length reserve/colts comp is a bit of a pipe dream IMO.

But maybe something along the lines of a U19 tournament?

Say across two weekends, (maybe the school holidays?) the NRC teams all send an U19 team (with perhaps up to 3 U20 guests) to Sydney.

Standard Knock out tournament, with 2nd tier semis, and 3rd/5th/7th placing matches.

Gives a very broad look at the junior talent, what with the cream of the schoolboys locked up with International duty, and the cream of the U20s in the NRC.

There is a preliminary plan for an U19 comp already. IDK the model they'll use.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I'd leave expansion in terms of an increase in teams well and truly alone. The NRC is just starting to get itself established.

What I would do if I were the ARU would be to have a women's competition ready to go for 2017. Same teams and play the women's game before the mens' game. At the moment there's a far greater chance of getting on to free to air with a women's component. And probably a very sympathetic ear from sponsors.

Every other sport in Australia is really getting a women's version of their game set, we don't want to be left at the starting barriers again.

A women's competition should be way up on the to do list for the ARU in regards to the NRC.

Another idea, and it's out there, would be searching for opportunities to broadcast the competition in new markets. Read today that the NBL just signed off on a deal to stream every game into China via Ali Sports. Now, I'm aware Basketball and Rugby sit on completely different ends of the popularity spectrum. But, Ali Sports did just sign on to help develop Rugby in China. Part of that would surely be actually showing the game.

 

[TOCC]

I dont see the ARU establishing a womens XV's comp in the next few years at least.. ARU have hitched the women rugby wagon onto 7's and rightfully so IMO. The new women 7's comp will startup next year based on a university model, this will be the primary focus for women rugby in the short-medium term, with flow-on benefits possible for the XV's version of the game in the longer term.

A U19's tournament aligned to the NRC makes a lot of sense though, aligning the development pathways will only help boost exposure of the NRC as well.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

A full length reserve/colts comp is a bit of a pipe dream IMO.

But maybe something along the lines of a U19 tournament?

Say across two weekends, (maybe the school holidays?) the NRC teams all send an U19 team (with perhaps up to 3 U20 guests) to Sydney.

Standard Knock out tournament, with 2nd tier semis, and 3rd/5th/7th placing matches.

Gives a very broad look at the junior talent, what with the cream of the schoolboys locked up with International duty, and the cream of the U20s in the NRC.

From memory it is part of aru strategic plan to establish nrc u20s comp.

We firstly need to get more people to current nrc games and watching on fox sports. Tough ask as needs marketing and seems the model of no advertising or promotion support provided to nrc clubs will continue. That is unless some financial innovation is found.

I think many are learning to have limited ambitions for Australian rugby and accept it as a minor niche sport that is about limiting the decline.

Unless a rich billionaire wants to bankroll Australian rugby as seems would need something really left field to change the status quo.

I use to think would be nice to have targets of average crowds of 2000 as a target and in say 5 years of 5000 for nrc games. I think maybe more about whether could reinvent something into longer form national competition which super rugby inhibits in current form and which nrc can't be and limited to drive appeal on current 7 round and finals format (and with super rugby way structured).

Sadly I think we just evolved out of amateur era into professional era with wrong rugby model and just added layers to an already flawed model.

This whole model needs to be rebuilit from ground up.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Quick Hands]

I dont see the ARU establishing a womens XV's comp in the next few years at least.. ARU have hitched the women rugby wagon onto 7's and rightfully so IMO. The new women 7's comp will startup next year based on a university model, this will be the primary focus for women rugby in the short-medium term, with flow-on benefits possible for the XV's version of the game in the longer term.

A U19's tournament aligned to the NRC makes a lot of sense though, aligning the development pathways will only help boost exposure of the NRC as well.

I didn't actually specify that the women's matches needed to be 15s.

 

[NTT]

One area the ARU could streamline to save a few more million $ is the centralisation of the administrative arms of the Super Rugby franchises. Each Super Rugby team in Australia, except the Force because we've already gone down this pathway, can afford to lose some of the expenditure that comes with 4 sets of administration basically doing the same job. Roll it all into one centralised body that runs the marketing, membership, enquiries etc that we are currently paying 4 sets of staff to do. Each state then sets up a separate smaller board/organization to run community rugby. Yes it means some jobs will go but it also means saving up to $10 million a year thats being wasted in duplicate roles. Thats money that could be freed up and used to develop the NRC, 7s, womens rugby etc.
New Zealand operate on a centralized model, it hasn't hurt the game over there. We need to restructure how our administrative services are provided to the Super Rugby franchises. We can't be always bemoaning falling behind the other codes. We need someone with the balls to stand up to the self interested, narrow minded dead wood of past eras and move towards the future. The ARU should not be propping up the franchises to over employ hangers on in wasteful duplicate roles, sadly it is though.

 

[Train Without a Station]

NTT I understand your point but you have to consider this from the franchises' POV.

The only areas of their income they can really influence and improve their profitability are sponsorship, attendance and memberships.

I'd be unhappy to give up control of that for a cookie cutter model.

I assume Match Day Revenue includes sponsorship. In 2015 the Reds made $5.9M from this, $6.5M from sponsorship and $1.7M from corporate hospitality on a marketing expenditure of $1.8M.

When you are talking about what accounts for $14M of your total $23M Revenue, you'd want to be in charge of your own destiny.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

NTT I understand your point but you have to consider this from the franchises' POV.

The only areas of their income they can really influence and improve their profitability are sponsorship, attendance and memberships.

I'd be unhappy to give up control of that for a cookie cutter model.

I assume Match Day Revenue includes sponsorship. In 2015 the Reds made $5.9M from this, $6.5M from sponsorship and $1.7M from corporate hospitality on a marketing expenditure of $1.8M.

When you are talking about what accounts for $14M of your total $23M Revenue, you'd want to be in charge of your own destiny.[/quote

The idea of shared service model is certainly not new and indeed has merit here for cost savings and learning from what New Zealand done makes a lot of sense.

The old adage of shared services is centralise those core transaction type / admin functions and keep your strategic functions.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

One area the ARU could streamline to save a few more million $ is the centralisation of the administrative arms of the Super Rugby franchises. Each Super Rugby team in Australia, except the Force because we've already gone down this pathway, can afford to lose some of the expenditure that comes with 4 sets of administration basically doing the same job. Roll it all into one centralised body that runs the marketing, membership, enquiries etc that we are currently paying 4 sets of staff to do. Each state then sets up a separate smaller board/organization to run community rugby. Yes it means some jobs will go but it also means saving up to $10 million a year thats being wasted in duplicate roles. Thats money that could be freed up and used to develop the NRC, 7s, womens rugby etc.
New Zealand operate on a centralized model, it hasn't hurt the game over there. We need to restructure how our administrative services are provided to the Super Rugby franchises. We can't be always bemoaning falling behind the other codes. We need someone with the balls to stand up to the self interested, narrow minded dead wood of past eras and move towards the future. The ARU should not be propping up the franchises to over employ hangers on in wasteful duplicate roles, sadly it is though.

Definitely should be looking to centralise some of the admin functions - which ones centralise and which one keep in house because of strategic reasons would be part of the review.

Not sure why has not happened and we have already New Zealand model can learn from.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Braveheart81]

The answer is somewhere in between.

You want to centralise the admin function as much as possible and retain control over areas that are franchise specific and/or of strategic importance such as sponsorship.

Some aspects are already centralised for at least some of the franchises (i.e. my Waratahs membership is renewed through the ARU).